1

BLOSSOMCommunity Garden & PavilionRISD Department of ArchitectureSpring 2011

2

RISD Department of Architecture

Architectural Design

Spring 2011

Proposal designed and constructed

by 72 RISD students under the

guidance of the following faculty:

Silvia Acosta, Coordinator

Adrienne Benz

Hansy Better

Jawn Lim

Enrique Martinez

Jason Wood

Wilbur E. Yoder

Project Made Possible by:

Mr. Louis Yip, Pui-O Corporation

Donors:

Mr. Louis Yip, Pui-O Corporation

Luke Charitable Foundation

RISD Department of Architecture

The Pawtucket Foundation

Material Donations:

JR Vinagro Corporation

Heritage Park YMCA

Special Thanks To:

Chinese Christian Church of Rhode Island

Sharon Partridge

Thomas Mann

Aaron Hertzberg

Douglas Hadden

The Pawtucket Times

Wilbur E. Yoder

3

Index

Introduction

Site

Proposal

Construction

Final Review

Acknowledgments

4

6

8

18

36

42

4

INTRODUCTION

The Rhode Island School of Design gives first year

architecture graduate and sophomore undergraduate

students a unique opportunity to design and build a

structure at full scale in the Architectural Design studio.

The course teaches analytical thinking and building

through the material act of construction, allowing

students to explore the relationship between drawing,

modeling, and building.

The semester is organized around a single project

with two interrelated phases. The first phase involves

the exploration, organization, and definition of a

proposal within a specific site. Students develop site

analyses and conceptual investigations to inform the

design process. The second phase teaches through

material studies, detailing and full-scale construction.

Architectural elements are integrated into the given

site, culminating in a fully articulated built structure.

The semester requires an enormous amount of

discipline, communication, coordination and teamwork.

Working collaboratively, students combine their

individual skills to solve complex architectural issues.

5

6

7

SITE

This year, the studio was asked to construct a

community garden and public event pavilion at 333

Roosevelt Avenue in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. Located

a short distance from downtown, 333 Roosevelt Avenue

has the potential to engage the Pawtucket community.

The area is influenced by the close proximity of City Hall,

William E. Tolman High School, the Sandra Feinstein-

Gamm theatre, and Slater Mill, leading a diverse group

of visitors to the Roosevelt Avenue site.

333 Roosevelt Avenue brings together three distinct

groups: the Chinese Christian Church of Rhode Island,

the Heritage Park YMCA: Early Childhood Education

Center, and Roosevelt Community Housing. Integrating

the divergent expectations of these groups became a

determining factor in the design. The intervention sites

itself on the available green space, simultaneously

addressing the needs of gardeners and visitors.

Prior to the intervention, the site consisted of a small

community garden, used by elderly members of the

Chinese Christian Church of Rhode Island, with a

clearing in the trees adjacent to the Blackstone River. A

parking lot separates the pavilion site from the garden.

8

PROPOSAL

Architectural Design is the first course in the

Department of Architecture studio sequence

in which students are expected to work

collaboratively. Working in six assigned sections,

the studio began with seventy-two individual site

proposals. As the construction phase of the studio

neared, the seventy-two projects were compiled

into eighteen, and then six, which were presented

to representatives of the constituent communities

for feedback, leading to the final design.

To develop the final proposal, the studio worked

via a series of twelve-hour charrettes to compose

a master plan and project timeline. The built

proposal began with a set of construction

drawings, scale models, and detailed studies that

were then brought on site to use as a working

reference. The proposal and construction

represent the combined efforts of seventy-two

undergraduate and graduate students. The

studio emphasized material considerations of

construction and detailing of the final design

through drawings and full-scale mock ups.

9

10

11

To develop the final proposal,

the studio worked via a series

of twelve-hour charrettes to

compose a master plan and

project timeline. The built

proposal began with a set of

construction drawings, scale

models, and detailed studies

that were then brought on site

to use as a working reference.

12

13Overall Site Plan 8’ 24’ 40’

14

1.

4.

2.

3.

6.

1.

6.

5.2. 3. 4.

5.

4’ 12’ 20’

15

1. 2. 3. 4.

1. 2. 3.

4.

4’ 12’ 20’

16

The proposal and construction represent the combined efforts of seventy-two undergraduate and graduate students. The studio

emphasized material considerations of construction and detailing of the final design through drawings and full-scale mock ups.

17

A sequence of experiential renderings were developed to

simulate the entrance sequence.

18

19

Northeast View of the Community Pavilion

20

21

CONSTRUCTION

Full-scale fabrication gives students the

opportunity to develop hands-on skills

and gain practical experience. Such

a project necessitates a constant and

flexible exchange of ideas, an efficient and

collaborative design process, and a strict

construction schedule. With only six weeks

to complete the project, management

has become an integral part of the studio

experience.

Responsibilities were divided between

construction, model building, design

details, and drawing documents. With

such strict deadlines, teams needed to

react quickly and creatively to issues as

they arose. Challenges like these provide

the real world experience that solidifies an

understanding of the relationship between

design and construction.

22

Ease of construction and maintenance were

a major consideration in the group proposal,

not only due to the challenges of coordinating

a large group of students, but due to the

condition of the site itself. With a significant

elevation change and a ground composed of a

combination of contaminated soil and infill, the

site required extensive preparation.

Continued drawing and model making efforts

were necessary throughout the construction

process. Once site preparation was complete

and construction began in earnest, members of

the drawing and model-making teams had to

outpace construction teams in the production of

documents and the resolution of details.

23

Throughout this process, the design evolved in

response to details that required an understanding of

the entirety of a full-scale structure.

Maintaining a fluid line of communication between

drawing, model-making, building and observation

has been an essential challenge of the construction

process. It has also necessitated that every student be

a conscious participant, continually integrating direct

experience with an awareness of the entire project.

24

25

Construction of the garden and community space tested

every facet of the architectural imagination. It provided

a crash course in the team-based challenges involved

in executing a project from a preliminary design to the

built environment. In this way, it models many of the

challenges of the architectural profession, and has thus

proved to be an invaluable learning experience.

26

27

28

The process of construction was one

of teamwork and cooperation between

students. It was that collaborative effort

that allowed for the development of

solutions when confronted with a problem.

29

30

Many elements of the design presented unique challenges during

construction and demanded new sets of solutions.

31

Construction resumes after a brief hail storm.

32

33

34

35

36

Presentation by Harley Nalley, Margaux Fischer, Camila Morales,

Kyle Kiser, Eugenia Yu, and Jessica Luscher.

Selected Quotes:

Harley: When we first started the project, all we knew is that

we had a lot of 2 x 6’s to work with. Some people may have been

skeptical. After all, how much can you do with a 2 x 6? Well, let me

tell you something. There’s a whole lot of jelly in those donuts.

Harley: So what is this site like? We have a river with heavily treed

banks running through an industrial city. The natural world and

the constructed world converge. But, though a human construct,

is industry not natural? By nature, people embrace growth. We are

opposed to the idea of loss and decay. We want to create a sense of

communion with our neighbors and with the world around us. We

want to operate efficiently and amiably with one another. We want

to be constructive.

Margaux: Our mission was to create a dynamic space for these

communities to meet, to learn and to play together. The more

we talked with the people around the site, the more we realized

the potential for our intervention—the Kindergarteners needed a

space to graduate, the Church deacons wanted to hold meetings

outdoors, the daycare teachers wanted a space to eat lunch.

FINAL REVIEW

37

38

Margaux: Soon the programmatic components took hold, more than just a garden,

we needed a large outdoor gathering space for friends to meet, we needed a

promenade for children to play, and perhaps as a testament to the communion we

were looking for, we needed a long table for families to break bread together.

Camila: The garden orientation was strategically placed as to take full advantage of

the sun orientation and allow for the growth of a variety of Chinese vegetables that

are used weekly for a communal meal. This north-south orientation quickly began to

dictate the direction of the grain of the garden.

The garden was designed as a multi-purpose structure that would house not only

the planting beds but also have an open aired pavilion that would allow for rainwater

collection, tool storage as well as gathering moments where the community could

enjoy the ‘fruits of their labor.’

Kyle: Just as the program is meant to enhance community, each element is meant

to hold a community of functions to better facilitate the complex intersections of

program prevalent in the garden

Eugenia: In our consideration of layered use, the lattice of columns are more than

a structural necessity—they are a programmatic gain. They are frames as well

as curtains—dividing space, shielding space, defining space. While holding space

between a roof and a floor. This continuity lives in the form of our work. Not one of

us could perform anything on site without the action of someone before us. The roof

needs the roof joists, the roof joists need the roof beams, the roof beams need the

columns, the columns need the floor beams, the floor beams need the concrete

forms, the forms need the ground. For us, we need the rock ramp and the floating

table. Each is an element and a connection.

39

Jessica: Compared to projects done solely in studio, the project we built here has a much higher degree of reality. Suddenly, our structure

went from model to full scale, you can walk through it. We realize how much detail goes into one joint. We have built something for a

community; we have interacted with and gotten feedback from people who are not architects, but people will be directly affected by our

work. This is not simply about designing something interesting, but about making something meaningful that will be used by a group of

people, something that is permanent, that will evolve over time and be added to by others in the future.

Jessica: We learned to articulate our ideas, to make connections, to listen, and discuss options with an open-minded, proactive

approach. Working with others and discovering where you stand within a group, and then realizing that you can influence that position,

is an incredibly important part of being a designer; our synergy as a studio allowed the 70 first years to accomplish what a twelve person

advanced studio could not.

40

41

42

Throughout the design and construction process, we had

the great privilege of working closely with the Chinese

Christian Church of Rhode Island and Heritage YMCA.

Since the initial site visit, we immediately understood the

incredible potential of this proposal, and every day since we

worked to produce a project that we can be proud to share.

The care and consideration that have gone into the design

and construction of the garden and community pavilion at

333 Roosevelt Avenue ensure that it will serve a diverse

group of users for years to come. We greatly appreciate

this opportunity to implement the design proposal at full

scale. RISD hopes to continue its relationship with the city

of Pawtucket as the Architecture Department continues to

develop its design-build program.

We acknowledge the generous support and contributions

made by Mr. Louis Yip, The Pawtucket Foundation, The

City of Pawtucket, Sharon Partridge and the Hertiage Park

YMCA, and the Congregation of the Chinese Christian

Church of Rhode Island. Your donations have been

instrumental to the completion of the project. It has been

an invaluable resource to have such engaged and interested

supporters. Thank you.

Sincerely,

The Students of Architectural Design

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

43

44

Kuzina ChengBeau JohnsonLissy KingDan LasterJeong LeeJessica LuscherFarhan MianMarisa PazJessica Shimazu Karl SippelNatanial ViceKun Wu

Royce Bixby Sifan Cheng Carlos GamezMelissa HauserGiles HoltDongseop LeeEdward MeadSusannah Stopford Peeraya Suphasidh Mykel Terada Eugenia Yu

Jeana Antle Julia BowlinLuna Chen Benjamin CrockerAlex DiazDinithi IddawelaBurce KaradagNicholas MooreHarley Nalley Andrew Salter Yuan Sun Nicole Wiznitzer

Alexander DaleMaryam DashtiBrett DunnamJulia FlorenzJungmin KimJacob MillerAdam MolinskyCamila MoralesMyunggeun SongShalini VimalBurgess Voshell

Sam AndersonAndy BahariEliot Bassett-CannJim BogleSheri FabianMargaux FischerElias GardnerDan Jiao Myn KangSonny LeeElizabeth RossiterClaire Watson

Mariana Botero Dodo Chiang Max DehnePeter DurrantWilliam JohnstonCatherine KaoKyle KiserKi Bbum LeeJohn McCampellJulie Sylvester

Jawn LimSilvia Acosta

Enrique MartinezAdrienne Benz

Jason WoodHansy Better

RISD Architectural Design 2011